Tag Archives: bafta

Money for nothing and your flicks for nearly free

Berlinale! BAFTAs! The Golden Globes! The Oscars! February seems to be the most concentrated period in the film calendar, especially the ‘award-winning film’ calendar. But how do all these star-laden and artistically challenging films get funded these days? And why do the plots often include scenes in unlikely countries? Step forward into the spotlight the unsung hero of the film business – the Fiscal Incentive.

In Europe, according to this new report from the Observatoire de l’Audiovisuel Europeene – (stargazers of a different kind) – there are 26 such incentives – eleven tax credits, nine rebates, and six tax shelters – spread across 17 countries. Half of them apply to TV production as well as cinema; three of the twenty-six also apply to funding video games. (Progress! Hooray!). The UK estimates that each £1 spent in the UK on film generates £12 in ‘Gross Value Added’.

praguefilm

If there are Trade or Culture ministers from some of the countries without such incentives reading this blog by the way, the report itself is yours to own  here if you have a spare €100. Which you probably do.

Each country is establishing these schemes for roughly the same reasons – to attract film production to their nation, give work to the production/facilities sector, and perhaps be sprinkled by some of that awards stardust. Sometimes cultural and artistic reasons to support film are also advanced, but that seems to be further and further down the small print these days.

In the last year alone, Lithuania, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Netherlands, and Slovakia have all brought in schemes. Ireland’s new Section 481 scheme started last month. Expect to see one or more of these countries on the credits of a few medium-budget productions in the coming months.The report talks about how employment, heritage awareness, consumer interest, economic growth, exports, tourism and so-called national ‘soft power’ are all reasons for these instruments to be set up. It’s certainly not money for nothing (cue the Dire Straits video below) but it comes at a cost.

To the producer, these incentive schemes seem to be an essential part of film and TV financing without which the film simply wouldn’t be made. And taken for granted by the bigger US based studios – who give the impression of just following the money around Europe, Romania one day, then Prague, then Malta. Even within the USA, California is losing out as ‘Hollywood’ movies are now mostly shot elsewhere. The State of California announced a few months ago that it will triple its tax breaks for entertainment companies doing business in the state, the latest effort to stem a tide of runaway production that has cost it billions in revenue.

So in European countries with attractive incentives, a succession of big-budget productions roll into town, with the ‘financial instrument’ largely paying for the employment of the film professionals of that location. The report calls these ‘portable productions’ , and says:

In mature Western European production sectors in particular – such as the UK, France, and Ireland – there are significant numbers of international portable productions attracted to the market. In many cases, portable productions are sourced from the major US studios, which are important users of production incentives.

The money comes in from government and is spent locally. Britain now has a roaring trade in such movies.  Scenes for hundreds of millions’ worth of films are produced in Europe which might otherwise get made somewhere else. Everyone’s a winner, right? I’m not so sure.  If this is national funding, it surely needs to work for the country’s own industry, and questions need to be asked. Does it improve the talent base in a country to make it self-sustaining? Does it encourage (smaller) local producers to work at home, or go abroad? Does it enable a country’s creative community to produce the next Big Thing?

The Muppet Movie, contributing to the UK’s cultural landscape?

The answers are in the Observatory’s densely argued and data-rich study, and I don’t have the film business knowledge to be able to analyse their analysis. The report does say that the government may not particularly care about these issues over pure economic ones

almost all of the incentive structures provide a greater return to the government in tax revenues than they cost to operate, whilst also providing standard trickle-down benefits to the broader economy, also including in areas such as tourism and exports.

I dealt with many creative economy issues when I worked for the BBC on the development of the production sector outside London. How could we incentivise producers? What was the right balance between ‘big producers’ (usually from London) and local/regional ones?  Did the regional film & TV sectors gain at all from this strategy? They weren’t issues with simple answers, and the impact or results weren’t immediately apparent.

As with TV,  measuring the impact of such a film production strategy purely in financial terms may only tell half the story. Is such film funding just making studio popcorn movies easier to finance? Are we using the resources of crews and talent on cinema that has no particular cultural value?  Does it take money away from ‘true cinema’? Or is this all part of a healthy mixed ecology of film production.  Comments, info & links all welcome.

 

 

 

 

on indie production and public service media

Back to Copenhagen after a week in London. I spent it catching up with production companies, distributors, and going to a day at the Televisual Factual Festival. Well moderated panels on Specialist Factual, Popular Factual, and how to make docs in danger zones,  an interview with Ralph Lee of Channel 4, and a room full of remote cameras to demonstrate using a ‘rig’ set up. Quite a few people that I knew, but even more that I didn’t. Great to be reminded by everybody’s clip reels of what had been on, and working, in the past months. Peter Hamilton’s recently done a good overview of the UK non-fiction market, well worth a read (and I’d recommend subscribing, too).

While there was plenty of discussion of the difficulties of operating in the UK – particularly as a smaller company – the view from the stage was still that there was a big market for a range of UK produced content, particularly factual, that new ideas were sought and would get through, and that producers were well placed to take advantage. The BBC, Channel 4, ITV and Five all seemed to be in the same space for factual. Internationally, British content is doing well too – there were some big winners at the International Emmys last night. I know this is a rosy view and it’s really hard to get commissions – there are so many good ideas out there.

I met some new indies who’d set up in the great indie start-up craze as Televisual called it – amongst them Andrea Miller & Jerry Foulkes of Sunnyside productions, Fenia Vardanis of Melina Media. And companies from Bristol like Testimony, the ever-expanding Icon films, and Tigress who have all carved out a healthy part of the market without having to join the London shark-pool.

And they’re competing in a market with some big players. Discovery & Viacom have bought All3Media and Channel5, Endemol, Shine & Core Media have merged, and Warner has completed a rebrand of the production companies it bought through Shed. On the horizon is the move of BBC in-house production to be a standalone independent company, able to work for other broadcasters as well as the BBC. But if it has to carry BBC overheads and staffing arrangements, I can’t see how it’s going to compete.

All public broadcasters are having to change – mostly by downsizing – and my new colleagues at SBS are facing cuts announced last week – those for the ABC are much larger. But in truth the changes now imposed on the ABC have been happening for many years in the UK sector. It’s not just about saving money, it’s driven by changes in how the creative industry wants to work, and the ways audiences want to watch. The best result would be a more balanced ecosystem of independents and inhouse, and content that people want to watch and use.

Some of that public service ecosystem is on show this week at the IDFA Forum, Festival and DocLab – public service content in all directions, and all of it coming from independent producers working with or without broadcasters. I’m not saying it’s all made for the small screen, a lot of doc films see themselves in opposition to television and see their natural home as the cinema (and good luck to them).

The challenge for Australian broadcasters is to keep a focus on this public service content, rather than chasing ratings or focussing on the now not so new platforms. SBS itself has a real challenge to keep history, arts, social documentary, international themes on the channel. The opposition in Australia has so many battles to fight – about climate change, the environment, immigration policy, cuts to Science R&D funding, that broadcasting and the creative sector maybe don’t get enough attention. But as an outsider to Australia, it needs work.

My London week was rounded off by a Saturday night party  for Anne Morrison, who’s left the BBC and is now Chair of BAFTA. She’s managed so much in her 33 years at the BBC, from 18 years running various factual departments, to driving the Nations and Regions strategy (how to move production and commissioning out of London and into the English regions and Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, which I worked for Anne on). And most recently the BBC Academy, the BBC’s training organisation. (You should check out the material that’s available for free on their website, particularly the Journalism section).

It was great to see old colleagues, both from the BBC and the independent sector. The quality television programmes produced in that room really captured a lot of my past, and I felt pretty proud to be a part of it. But I couldn’t help feeling we were the lucky ones to have been able to work in such a well-supported organisation. 

Thanks for reading till the end, feel free to share, comments welcome below.